Nothing tugs at our heart strings like a sick child. When pressed to producefacts regarding how animal research has enhanced our lives, researcherswill frequently speak of a sick child whose life was saved as a result ofanimal research. The focus of the explanation will be the emotional appealof a sick child instead of actually relating facts about the research. Tearfulparents will be asked to share their opinion of animal research. The almightydoctor who has just saved their child has told them that the knowledge gainedfrom research on animals was used to save the child. In this emotional setting,we the viewer are confronted by individuals much like ourselves, who assureus that animal research is productive and necessary. What would any of ussay in the same situation? The same thing, of course. So what we are actuallywitnessing is the parents being callously manipulated by the medical establishment.The distraught parents are only repeating what their doctors have assuredthem is true. What we do not witness or know, is what interest the doctorhas in animal research. Does she or he work for a university heavily fundedby the NIH funding research on animals? Has she or he ever taken a criticallook at animal research to see if what he was taught was true? Or has sheor he just repeated the age old line that all the great medical advanceshave come from research on animals, and in fact knows no better? Physiciansare trained to be just that, physicians. They are not trained to be medicalhistorians. Most are told that animal experiments made possible the treatmentsthey administer and never give it another thought. Working 20 hours perday during internship and residency does not lend itself to critically evaluatingthe system. The physicians and parents and patients who give testimonialsto animal research are not bad people, merely misinformed. Please don'tmisunderstand, there are people who are paid to mislead the public: spokespersonsfor the tobacco industry, spokespersons for the animal research industry,and those who pay their mortgage from the grant money for animal experiments.But most physicians do not have a vested interest and simply have nevercritically evaluated the situation. Why should they?

The Foundation for Biomedical Research has produced a video entitled HOPE,which accounts the scenarios of numerous children saved as a result of researchon animals. It also portrays the death of one child whose life could havebeen saved with more animal research. Concepts which rely on emotional appealinstead of fact should raise suspicion in our minds. If the facts of thecase are so persuasive and overwhelming, why do they avoid facts, speakin sweeping generalities, and assure us that the only way to save babiesis through research on animals? What has animal research done for sick children?Where have the advances come from? Must we choose between children and animalsor must the researcher choose between what is expedient and what actuallyworks?